On Nov 28, 2016, at 4:07 PM, Jeff Dyke wrote:
> And you do get a small SEO boost for being https forward.
Not necessarily -- some SEO engines are now doing the opposite, and penalizing non-https sites. Google announced plans to start labeling non-https sites as "insecure" in 2017 too.
It's incredibly simple (and free) to set up SSL via LetsEncrypt on all domains - so I would do that.
On Nov 28, 2016, at 2:37 PM, steve wrote:
> It seems that search engines are probing https: even for sites that don't offer it, just because it's available for others, with the end result that pages are being attributed to the wrong site.
In terms of your current situation with SEO and attribution -- can the original poster share any examples of the search engines and domains/results? I'd honestly love to see some of what is going on, what you interpreted pretty much never happens. A search engine might probe for data via https; but it won't attribute a resource to a domain/protocol it didn't actually load it from. This alleged Search Engine behavior is something that I've never seen with Google, Bing (or other "standard" engines) and I've managed SEO for a handful of top publishers. From my experience and a lack of evidence, I have no reason to believe this is the actual problem.
OTOMH, there are a lot of possible issues that could cause this.
The most likely issue is that there is a misconfiguration on nginx and 3 things are happening:
1. there exists a link to the "wrong domain" for the content somewhere on the internet
2. nginx is serving a file on the "wrong domain"
3. the pages do not list a "canonical url"
If you have a thoroughly broken nginx installation and are serving the content on a wrong domain, almost every search engine will transfer the resource's link equity to the canonical URL. They're only going to show the data on the wrong domain/scheme if you allowed it to be served on the wrong domain/scheme, and failed to include a canonical.
If you are dealing with a broken search engine/spider for random service, there are lots of those, and you want to address it.... The problem could be because the client doesn't process SSL or SNI correctly, so you might be able to do:
A) single certificate HTTPS on IP#1 + (SNI HTTPS & plain-http on IP#2)
B) single certificate HTTPS on IP#1 + SNI HTTPS on IP#2 + Plain HTTP on IP#3
You could also just isolate the given spiders by their browser id, and handle them with custom content or redirects.
None of the major search engines work in the manner you suggest though.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx/attachments/20161130/1ae54de5/attachment.html>